[mkgmap-dev] Problem with turn restriction

Tue Feb 4 21:06:13 GMT 2014

Hi Gerd,

I get an exception when running the branch:

java.lang.NullPointerException
	at 
uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.general.RoadNetwork.addRestriction(RoadNetwork.java:275)
	at 
uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.general.MapDetails.addRestriction(MapDetails.java:130)
	at 
uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.osmstyle.StyledConverter.createRouteRestrictionsFromPOI(StyledConverter.java:855)
	at 
uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.osmstyle.StyledConverter.end(StyledConverter.java:587)
	at 
uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.reader.osm.ElementSaver.convert(ElementSaver.java:239)
	at 
uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.reader.osm.bin.OsmBinMapDataSource.load(OsmBinMapDataSource.java:67)
	at 
uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.reader.osm.OsmMapDataSource.load(OsmMapDataSource.java:127)
	at uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.main.MapMaker.loadFromFile(MapMaker.java:167)
	at uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.main.MapMaker.makeMap(MapMaker.java:63)
	at uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.main.Main$1.call(Main.java:220)
	at uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.main.Main$1.call(Main.java:1)
	at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(Unknown Source)
	at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(Unknown Source)
	at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(Unknown Source)
	at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)

I'll try again with assertions enabled to find the restriction which 
causes the problem.

WanMil

> no problem.
>
> I also think your patch is also complaining about invalid restrictions
> with the wrong messages.
> Attached my proposal.
>
> Gerd
>
>  > Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 21:44:33 +0100
>  > From: wmgcnfg at web.de
>  > To: mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
>  > Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Problem with turn restriction
>  >
>  > Arghhh....
>  > I started mkgmap from the wrong workspace. I should have been more
>  > alarmed that I got exactly the same number of problems!
>  >
>  > Ok, I will try again and hopefully the number of problems will be
>  > reduced *very* much.
>  >
>  > Sorry!!
>  > WanMil
>  >
>  > > Hi WanMil,
>  > >
>  > > with your patch I see more messages for my Niedersachsen data,
>  > > but not a single one starts with "Late invalid".
>  > >
>  > > Maybe you are looking at an old result file?
>  > >
>  > > Gerd
>  > >
>  > > > Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 21:21:31 +0100
>  > > > From: wmgcnfg at web.de
>  > > > To: mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
>  > > > Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Problem with turn restriction
>  > > >
>  > > > Hi Gerd,
>  > > >
>  > > > your fixes for 3) were already sorted out by my checks. So relations
>  > > > without via coord in the bbox were not counted.
>  > > >
>  > > > I wonder why your fixes for 1) do not help. I have expected that it
>  > > > removes some of the 851 problems...
>  > > >
>  > > > By the way:
>  > > > 2) mmh, I don't mind adding that but I think it can be addressed with
>  > > > very low priority. If there is a street where u-turns are not allowed
>  > > > the street should be mapped with separate ways for each direction
>  > > > (that's my opinion - don't know if that matches with the official
>  > > > mapping guidelines).
>  > > >
>  > > > 4) Ok, they can be ignored. Would be great if we can detect them to
>  > > > output different log messages for them.
>  > > >
>  > > > WanMil
>  > > >
>  > > > > Hi WanMil,
>  > > > >
>  > > > > that's strange. With r3000 I saw many problems for
> Niedersachen, with
>  > > > > r3002 only 4, and those were the two examples.
>  > > > >
>  > > > > I am downloading latest Germany now.
>  > > > >
>  > > > > Gerd
>  > > > >
>  > > > >
>  > > > >
>  > > > > WanMil wrote
>  > > > >> Hi Gerd,
>  > > > >>
>  > > > >> I think your changes are good.
>  > > > >> Anyhow for my special purpose I don't see any difference after
>  > > your fixes.
>  > > > >> So I will explain what and how I am checking the restrictions (see
>  > > > >> attached patch with the check code).
>  > > > >>
>  > > > >> All restrictions that are valid after loading but which cannot be
>  > > > >> written to the map because there is a problem when the
>  > > > >> RestrictionRelation.addRestriction(..) is called are logged
> with the
>  > > > >> (not very useful...) text "Late invalid: "+URL of restriction.
>  > > > >>
>  > > > >> See relation_problems.txt with the results. There are 851
> problems in
>  > > > >> Germany using the tiles created with attached areas.list.
>  > > > >>
>  > > > >> I am not sure if really all logged restrictions are completely
>  > > valid but
>  > > > >> all I checked should make its way into the mkgmap compiled map.
>  > > > >>
>  > > > >> I hope this helps you to find some other problematic places!
>  > > > >>
>  > > > >> WanMil
>  > > > >>
>  > > > >>> Hi WanMil,
>  > > > >>>
>  > > > >>> up to now I found these reasons for problems:
>  > > > >>> 1) one error in the branch: via coords were replaced without
> updating
>  > > > >>> the corrresponding restrictions and the hash map
>  > > > >>> 2) "no_u_turn" restrictions were not added
>  > > > >>> if from-way and to-way are equal. They are evaluated to be
> valid, but
>  > > > >>> I don't know if they really make sense?
>  > > > >>> 3) restrictions are added to the restrictions hash map even if
>  > > the via
>  > > > >>> coord is
>  > > > >>> not contained in the bounding box.
>  > > > >>>
>  > > > >>> 4) restrictions that have a from-way or to-way which
>  > > > >>> is not added with a routable type or not at all,
>  > > > >>> e.g. way http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/225540783
>  > > > >>> has no tags but is part of three restriction relations.
>  > > > >>> Another example:
>  > > > >>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2880411
>  > > > >>> refers to ways that are tagged lane=tertiary
>  > > > >>> and the default style ignores them.
>  > > > >>>
>  > > > >>> In high-prec-coords branch r3003 I've fixed 1) to 3), please
>  > > > >>> check again.
>  > > > >>>
>  > > > >>> Gerd
>  > > > >>>
>  > > > >>>
>  > > > >>>
>  > > > >>> > Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 13:01:40 -0800
>  > > > >>> > From:
>  > > > >
>  > > > >> gpetermann_muenchen@
>  > > > >
>  > > > >>> > To:
>  > > > >
>  > > > >> mkgmap-dev at .org
>  > > > >
>  > > > >>> > Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Problem with turn restriction
>  > > > >>> >
>  > > > >>> > WanMil wrote
>  > > > >>> > >> I want to make a small statistic why restriction relations
>  > > become
>  > > > >>> > >> invalid. Maybe the problem is so seldom that it's not
> worthy...
>  > > > >>> > >
>  > > > >>> > > I have made a short stat with the high-prec branch:
>  > > > >>> > > There are around 850 relations that are valid
>  > > > >>> > > (RestrictionRelation.isValid() == true) after loading but
>  > > that are
>  > > > >>> not
>  > > > >>> > > valid when the StyledConverter calls
>  > > > >>> > > RestrictionRelations.convertRelation(MapCollector ...).
>  > > > >>> > > So it seems to me as if the problem is greater than expected.
>  > > > >>> >
>  > > > >>> > Yes, sounds too much. The only good case that I can think of
>  > > > >>> > is that the relation is saved by splitter because one of the
>  > > > >>> > related ways has at least one point within the boundary, but
>  > > > >>> > another part of the relation is outside of the boundary.
>  > > > >>> > If the via node is within the tile boundary we should be able
>  > > > >>> > to create the restriction.
>  > > > >>> >
>  > > > >>> > Gerd
>  > > > >>> >
>  > > > >>> >
>  > > > >>> >
>  > > > >>> > --
>  > > > >>> > View this message in context:
>  > > > >>>
>  > >
> http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Problem-with-turn-restriction-tp5795049p5795167.html
>  > > > >>> > Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at
>  > > Nabble.com.
>  > > > >>> > _______________________________________________
>  > > > >>> > mkgmap-dev mailing list
>  > > > >>> >
>  > > > >
>  > > > >> mkgmap-dev at .org
>  > > > >
>  > > > >>> > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>  > > > >>>
>  > > > >>>
>  > > > >>> _______________________________________________
>  > > > >>> mkgmap-dev mailing list
>  > > > >>>
>  > > > >
>  > > > >> mkgmap-dev at .org
>  > > > >
>  > > > >>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>  > > > >>>
>  > > > >>
>  > > > >>
>  > > > >> _______________________________________________
>  > > > >> mkgmap-dev mailing list
>  > > > >
>  > > > >> mkgmap-dev at .org
>  > > > >
>  > > > >> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>  > > > >>
>  > > > >> relation_check.patch (1K)
>  > > > >>
>  > >
> &lt;http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/attachment/5795291/0/relation_check.patch&gt;
>  > > > >> areas.list (14K)
>  > > > >>
> &lt;http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/attachment/5795291/1/areas.list&gt;
>  > > > >> relation_problems.txt (71K)
>  > > > >>
>  > >
> &lt;http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/attachment/5795291/2/relation_problems.txt&gt;
>  > > > >
>  > > > >
>  > > > >
>  > > > >
>  > > > >
>  > > > > --
>  > > > > View this message in context:
>  > >
> http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Problem-with-turn-restriction-tp5795049p5795294.html
>  > > > > Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at
> Nabble.com.
>  > > > > _______________________________________________
>  > > > > mkgmap-dev mailing list
>  > > > > mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
>  > > > > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>  > > > >
>  > > >
>  > > > _______________________________________________
>  > > > mkgmap-dev mailing list
>  > > > mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
>  > > > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > _______________________________________________
>  > > mkgmap-dev mailing list
>  > > mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
>  > > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>  > >
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > mkgmap-dev mailing list
>  > mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
>  > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>